MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010788199 · doi:10.1017/s0954579405050261

Adolescent Cluster A personality disorder symptoms, role assumption in the transition to adulthood, and resolution or persistence of symptoms

2005· article· en· W2010788199 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia Cohen, Henian Chen, Stephanie Kasen, Jeffrey G. Johnson, Thomas N. Crawford, Kathy Gordon

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment and Psychopathology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsPsychologyPersistence (discontinuity)Developmental psychologyPersonalityCluster (spacecraft)PsychopathologyPersonality developmentYoung adultPopulationVulnerability (computing)Clinical psychologyEarly adulthoodSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychiatryDemographySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cluster A odd or eccentric personality disorder (PD) symptoms may reflect a schizophrenia spectrum biological vulnerability in at least some persons. Consequently, this symptom pattern may have particularly negative effects on the transition from adolescent to adult roles. A general population sample of 200 young adults was assessed on Cluster A PD at mean ages 17 and 22, and subsequently provided detailed narratives about their monthly experiences and behaviors between these two ages. Adolescent Cluster A PD was related to the developmental trajectories of residential, career, financial, romantic, and family formation roles during this period, and trajectories were related to a change in symptoms over this period. Symptoms were associated with early parenthood and less advanced education, but for other developmental outcomes tended to differ for men and women. These gender differences were attributable, in part, to the differential meaning and consequences of early parenthood for men and women.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.819

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopment and PsychopathologySame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207